Belivers Church, Thiruvalla v. State of Kerala & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **MONDAY, THE 13[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021/22ND BHADRA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 4199 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONERS:** **1 BELIVERS CHURCH, THIRUVALLA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE, BISHOP DR. SAMUEL MATHEW, AGED 53, S/O. MATHEW, KAITHAPPATTALIL, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, ST. THOMAS NAGAR, PUNNAKUNNAM MURI, KUTTAPPUZHA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA - 689 103, THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CHURCH, JACOB POTHEN, AGED 57, S/O. LATE POTHEN, THERADIYIL HOUSE, NIRANAM WEST MURI, NIRANAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK. 2 REV. JOJU MATHEW, VICAR GENERAL, NIRANAM DIOCESE, THOTTABHAGOM, THIRUVALLA.** **BY ADVS. SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE SMT.DIVYA K.NAIR SMT.S.SIKKY** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.** WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 2 : - **3 ARYANCODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ARYANCODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, NEYYATINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 125.** - **4 RAJESH KUMAR K.L., S/O LATE KRISHNAN NAIR, SRI LALITHAM, CHERUTHAMPODE, KEEZHAROOR P.O., 695 130. KKL-1927730 KSRTC THAMPANOOR DEPO (STAFF).** - **5 SHAJI T., SHAJI NIVAS, AMBATHALA, KUTTIYANIKKADU, KEEZHAROOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 130. [PASTOR : C.N.GANGADHARAN, KEEZHAROOR]** **[ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 & 5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01.07.2016 IN I.A.NO.10077/2016 IN THE WP(C)]** **BY ADVS. R1-R2 SRI.SYAMANTHAK B.S, G.P. R3 SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN R3 SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 3 : **J U D G M E N T** ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _**Dated this the 13[th] day of September, 2021**_ The 1[st] petitioner is an Episcopal Church and the 2[nd] petitioner is the Vicar General of the Diocese. They are before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P4 and P11 and to direct the 3[rd] respondent to extend the validity of Ext.P3 for a further period of three years without insisting any sanction from the 2[nd] respondent. 2. The congregation of the petitioners owns a Church building in Aryancode Grama Panchayat. The petitioners, in the year 2007, decided to reconstruct the Church. Ext.P3 Building Permit dated 17.10.2017 was issued by the 3[rd] respondent-Panchayat. When the petitioners were about to start construction, the 3[rd] respondent issued Ext.P4 notice stating that permission of the District Administration is necessary for the construction and if the petitioners do not WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 4 : obtain the same, the Building Permit will be suspended. 3. The Paster of the Church immediately submitted an application before the 2[nd] respondent-District Collector. A hearing was conducted on 21.11.2011. However, no order was passed by the 2[nd] respondent. By Ext.P8 letter dated 09.07.2012, the 2[nd] respondent called for a report from the Village Officer. In the meanwhile, as per Ext.P9 resolution dated 12.06.2013, the Panchayat Committee unanimously resolved to recommend issuance of NOC to the petitioners. 4. As the 2[nd] respondent failed to pass any orders, the petitioners filed W.P.(C) No.21658/2018. The 2[nd] respondent thereupon rejected the application for permission submitted by the petitioner as per Ext.P11 order dated 09.10.2014. The petitioners would contend that this Court has held in _**Thomas Varghese v. District Collector** [2014 (3) KLT 675]_ that proviso to Rule 7(8) of the Panchayat Building Rules is applicable only to security zone. The proposed site is not within any security zone and hence the 2[nd] respondent ought not have rejected the application. WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 5 : 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners strongly contended that there is nothing objectionable in petitioners constructing a place of worship. The local authority as well as Revenue officials have reported that there is no harm in constructing a Church at the proposed site. The petitioners are only seeking renewal of the Building Permit already issued. 6. The 3[rd] respondent-Grama Panchayat filed a counter affidavit. The 3[rd] respondent stated that serious allegations were raised by the 5[th] respondent with respect to construction of the new Church. The Church authorities had indulged in religious conversion activities. Some of the persons connected to the Church gave provacative speeches abusing other religions. The peace in the locality is strained. The activities of the Church would give rise to social and communal disharmony and law and order problem. 7. The 3[rd] respondent further stated that the Building Permit was issued for the re-erection of a building. Therefore, the law requires procurement of prior approval or clearance or WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 6 : permission or concurrence of the District Collector concerned, in the light of the Manual of Guidelines to Prevent and Control Communal Disturbances and to Promote Communal Harmony, 2005 contained in the Government Order dated 25.07.2005. 8. The 2[nd] respondent also filed a counter affidavit. The 2[nd] respondent stated that there is a protest against the construction of Church in the locality and there are chances of communal disturbances if sanction is given to the Church. The complaint submitted by one J. Rajesh on behalf of Hindu Aikyavedi was enquired through the Rural S.P. The report revealed apprehensions of Hindu Aikyavedi and the chance of law and order issues in the area. It was also reported that there is a “7[th] Day Church” just 50 metres away and a Church of Salvation Army just 500 metres far from the proposed Church. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the 3[rd] respondent. WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 7 : 10. The authorities, after causing enquiries in the matter, have come to a conclusion that the construction of the Church at the site is likely to cause communal disturbances and law and order problems. The argument of the petitioners is that the Church is not falling within any security zone and therefore proviso to Rule 7(8) of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules will not apply. 11. But, it has to be noted that the Government of Kerala has framed Manual of Guidelines to Prevent and Control Communal Disturbances and to Promote Communal Harmony, 2005, as per Government Order dated 25.07.2005 under which prior permission of the District Administration is required for construction or re-construction of places of worship. The District Magistrate considered the reports received from the various authorities including that of the District Police Chief and Revenue Divisional Officer. On the basis of the report of the Police based on intelligence inputs, the District Collector came to a conclusion that construction of the Church at the proposed site may result in communal WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 8 : disharmony and law and order problems. The District Collector under such circumstances rejected the application submitted by the petitioners for permission. This Court does not find any illegality or arbitrariness in Ext.P4 or Ext.P11 orders. The writ petition is therefore without any merit and it is hence dismissed. Sd/- **N. NAGARESH, JUDGE** aks/14.09.2021 WP(C) No.4199/2016 : 9 : ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4199/2016** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED OF THE EXHIBIT P1 PROPETY OF THE PETITIONER DATED 11/10/2014. TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT TAX PAID FOR EXHIBIT P2 THE PROPERTY DATED 07/03/2005 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED EXHIBIT P3 17/10/2007 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE BY THE 3RD EXHIBIT P4 RESPONDENT DATED 13/02/2008 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE 2ND EXHIBIT P5 RESPONDENT DATED 25/02/2008 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE FROM THE 2ND EXHIBIT P6 RESPONDENT DATED 16/11/2011 TRUE COPY OF THE N.O.C DATED 16/01/2012 EXHIBIT P7 BY PRESIDENT OF PANCHYATH COMMITTEE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY EXHIBIT P8 THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 09/07/2012 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED BY EXHIBIT P9 THE PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE DATED 12/06/2013 TRUE COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER EXHIBIT P10 DATED 21/06/2013 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND EXHIBIT P11 RESPONDENT DATED 09/10/2014.** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE EXHIBIT R2(a) TAHSILDAR, KATTAKADA DATED 18.11.2019. TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE EXHIBIT R2(b) INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANCODE DATED 20.11.2019. A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED EXHIBIT R3(a) 17.5.2013 PREFERRED BY T.SHAJI** ncd